• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What's in the Iran nuclear deal? 7 key points

What's in the Iran nuclear deal?

Lots words like 'prostitution' 'kickbacks' 'expense accounts' 'first class' 'don't tell spouses' 'always pay cash' 'leave no paper trail'.

Oops...those are the words that are not in the agreement. The above words are the things that the 'negotiators' do with their spare time.
 
Because there really isn't any significance to it.

For starters, Iran is still highlighted several times in Clapper's assessment, especially in regards to its nuclear ambitions. However, neither at this time is considered a direct threat to U.S. interests. The state department list is simply a list of terrorist organizations around the world, whether they are a threat to U.S. interests or not.

As I said, they are two entirely different lists and assessments. That's not "diminishing" anything, that's simply stating fact.

To the bolded, I disagree, and consider it very significant.

State Department deletes Hezbollah from terror list - San Francisco Bay Area Moderate Conservative | Examiner.com
 
Have you heard Iran say that. Or are you accepting one translation over another?

“It was only perhaps three weeks ago that the president of Iran once again said that Israel should be eradicated off the face of the Earth. As you recall, it was about in 2005 when he [Mahmoud Ahmadinejad] said before that Israel -- he would use a nuclear weapon to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth.”

In 2005, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, during a meeting with protesting students at Iran's Interior Ministry, quoted a remark from Ayatollah Khomeini, founder of Iran's Islamic revolution, that Israel "must be wiped out from the map of the world."

Ahmadinejad then said: "And God willing, with the force of God behind it, we shall soon experience a world without the United States and Zionism," according to a quote published by Iran's state news outlet, the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA).

Truth squad: Has Iran said it wants to attack Israel? - CNN.com

From a far left liberal, death to America is more habit than conviction. What a basket case.

On CBS This Morning: Saturday, reporter Elizabeth Palmer did her best to channel the sentiments of Iran following the preliminary nuclear agreement between them and the United States. The CBS reporter proclaimed that “at Friday prayers there was the usual chant of death to America, but more habit than conviction. - See more at: CBS: Iran
 
“It was only perhaps three weeks ago that the president of Iran once again said that Israel should be eradicated off the face of the Earth. As you recall, it was about in 2005 when he [Mahmoud Ahmadinejad] said before that Israel -- he would use a nuclear weapon to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth.”

In 2005, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, during a meeting with protesting students at Iran's Interior Ministry, quoted a remark from Ayatollah Khomeini, founder of Iran's Islamic revolution, that Israel "must be wiped out from the map of the world."

Ahmadinejad then said: "And God willing, with the force of God behind it, we shall soon experience a world without the United States and Zionism," according to a quote published by Iran's state news outlet, the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA).

Truth squad: Has Iran said it wants to attack Israel? - CNN.com

From a far left liberal, death to America is more habit than conviction. What a basket case.

On CBS This Morning: Saturday, reporter Elizabeth Palmer did her best to channel the sentiments of Iran following the preliminary nuclear agreement between them and the United States. The CBS reporter proclaimed that “at Friday prayers there was the usual chant of death to America, but more habit than conviction. - See more at: CBS: Iran
Obama's Middle East policy is 'willful ignorance', asserts Obama's former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency - Fionna Agomuoh
 
The headline of that story is wrong.

Why do you consider it significant?

Because I agree with the Chairmen on the subcommittee of terrorism that it was political in nature, and that nothing in Iran or Hezbollah's behaviour has changed in the last twelve months that would make this change prudent.
 
Because I agree with the Chairmen on the subcommittee of terrorism that it was political in nature, and that nothing in Iran or Hezbollah's behaviour has changed in the last twelve months that would make this change prudent.

Except that Hezbollah, for better or for worse, has been helping to fight ISIS.

The NI director's assessment is simply that. It's not like anything will really change. What has Hezbollah done in the last 12 months to show that it poses a threat to U.S. interests? (Interests, not allies like Israel. Our stuff)

I just don't see the significance that so many others with a clear agenda seem to -- especially the chairman of the Senate terrorism subcommittee, one Mr. Lindsay Graham.
 
Because I agree with the Chairmen on the subcommittee of terrorism that it was political in nature, and that nothing in Iran or Hezbollah's behaviour has changed in the last twelve months that would make this change prudent.

Quick question: Did you actually read Clapper's report? Not an article on it, but the actual report?
 
Quick question: Did you actually read Clapper's report? Not an article on it, but the actual report?

Quick question: what does it matter if he had or had not?
 
Isreal:
Free Syrian Army
Jundallah
People's Mujahedin of Iran
Party of Free Life of Kurdistan

US:
Contras in the 1980's
ISIS
Mujahideen during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan
Jabhat al-Nusra
Free Syrian Army

U.S.-backed Syria rebels routed by fighters linked to al-Qaeda - The Washington Post
Israel and Proxy Terrorism

Nothing but empty propaganda and parts of it were already debunked in a previous discussion so you're recycling old material.
If you're going to rely on rumors, unnamed officials and 'CIA memos' then just say so from the beginning instead of making your baseless assertions sound like a proven fact.

Israel did not support the free Syrian army although it isn't even recognized as a terror group by any Western nation so you're being ridiculous.
Your assertion that Israel has ties with Jundallah was already debunked and it is based on the far-left Ha'aretz's claims that are in turn based allegedly on some random CIA memo. The claims regarding the MEK are also mere rumors and assassinating Iranian-government personnel who are the key in advancing the Iranian regime towards nuclear weapons is far from being terrorism. The claim regarding the PKK is simply absurd - not only has Israel never aided the PKK it is actually told to have helped arrest its leader back in 1999 in Kenya.

The US had never supported ISIS, it has supported the rebels in general until it was revealed that the weapons it provides are falling to the hands of terror groups such as al-Qaeda and ISIS. That's not the same as supporting ISIS and you're being ridiculous. Same goes for Afghanistan and Jabat al-Nusra which is a branch of al-Qaeda. The Free Syrian Army, again, is not a recognized terror organization, it fights al-Assad and his soldiers and not civilians.

I have no doubt that even though I have debunked your claims for the second time now you're going to post them again in a different thread in a while from now. That's what propagandists do I guess.
 
Nothing but empty propaganda and parts of it were already debunked in a previous discussion so you're recycling old material.
If you're going to rely on rumors, unnamed officials and 'CIA memos' then just say so from the beginning instead of making your baseless assertions sound like a proven fact.

Israel did not support the free Syrian army although it isn't even recognized as a terror group by any Western nation so you're being ridiculous.
Your assertion that Israel has ties with Jundallah was already debunked and it is based on the far-left Ha'aretz's claims that are in turn based allegedly on some random CIA memo. The claims regarding the MEK are also mere rumors and assassinating Iranian-government personnel who are the key in advancing the Iranian regime towards nuclear weapons is far from being terrorism. The claim regarding the PKK is simply absurd - not only has Israel never aided the PKK it is actually told to have helped arrest its leader back in 1999 in Kenya.

The US had never supported ISIS, it has supported the rebels in general until it was revealed that the weapons it provides are falling to the hands of terror groups such as al-Qaeda and ISIS. That's not the same as supporting ISIS and you're being ridiculous. Same goes for Afghanistan and Jabat al-Nusra which is a branch of al-Qaeda. The Free Syrian Army, again, is not a recognized terror organization, it fights al-Assad and his soldiers and not civilians.

I have no doubt that even though I have debunked your claims for the second time now you're going to post them again in a different thread in a while from now. That's what propagandists do I guess.
You havent debunked anything. All you do is throw insults and rant about how Isreal is the victim when in fact its the aggressor and the true danger in the region and has been for years. Typical disinformation and hypocrisy and coming from a PEGIDA supporter too.

Iran

As far as the US supporting ISIS there's a ton of documented evidence, from both the left and the right wing too.

How the US Supports the Islamic State (ISIS): One “Accidental Airdrop” vs Billions in Covert Military Aid | Global Research - Centre for Research on Globalization
How the US Helped ISIS Grow Into a Monster | Mother Jones
US secretly backs rebels to fight al-Qaeda in Syria - Telegraph
 
You havent debunked anything. All you do is throw insults and rant about how Isreal is the victim when in fact its the aggressor and the true danger in the region and has been for years. Typical disinformation and hypocrisy and coming from a PEGIDA supporter too.

Iran

As far as the US supporting ISIS there's a ton of documented evidence, from both the left and the right wing too.

How the US Supports the Islamic State (ISIS): One “Accidental Airdrop” vs Billions in Covert Military Aid | Global Research - Centre for Research on Globalization
How the US Helped ISIS Grow Into a Monster | Mother Jones
US secretly backs rebels to fight al-Qaeda in Syria - Telegraph

Yes well if we empty this post from personal attacks it's nothing but a clear cutting evidence that your claims have indeed been debunked.
You've done nothing to back your baseless assertions and change their status from being baseless assertions to being based facts.

Regarding the Wikipedia link it says nothing regarding your claim that Israel aids the PKK or the free Syrian army which isn't even a terror organization.
In relation to Jundallah, all it does is to refer to a Khamenei statement that Israel cooperates with the organization.
In relation to the MEK, it refers to the same "unnamed officials" who claim that Israel used the MEK to do something that isn't terrorism(the assassinations of Iranian-government agents) in your previous article.

And regarding the US-ISIS assertion you've referred to links that do not show the US had purposely delivered arms hoping they would fall to the hands of the Islamic State and al-Qaeda. Two of these links are actual propaganda pieces, one from a very known propaganda site, globalresearch. Hilariously enough, the third link you've provided from the Telegraph claims the US had allegedly provided aid to rebel groups so to fight ISIS and al-Qaeda, not to support it.

Empty propaganda. Typical to a supporter of Shiite terror organizations.
 
Last edited:
Quick question: what does it matter if he had or had not?

Because he'd see Iran's inclusion in the proper context. And because he'd see what the report actually is.
 
Except that Hezbollah, for better or for worse, has been helping to fight ISIS.

The NI director's assessment is simply that. It's not like anything will really change. What has Hezbollah done in the last 12 months to show that it poses a threat to U.S. interests? (Interests, not allies like Israel. Our stuff)

I just don't see the significance that so many others with a clear agenda seem to -- especially the chairman of the Senate terrorism subcommittee, one Mr. Lindsay Graham.

Whoa, you suggesting I have an agenda, I don't patronise Obama. If I think he's wrong, Libya, Egypt, Syria, I point it out, if I think he's right, Israel, Iran, I point that out. I think that particularly in the midst of nuclear negotiations with Ian, that this declassification represents politics, and not national security.
 
Nothing but empty propaganda and parts of it were already debunked in a previous discussion so you're recycling old material.
If you're going to rely on rumors, unnamed officials and 'CIA memos' then just say so from the beginning instead of making your baseless assertions sound like a proven fact.

Israel did not support the free Syrian army although it isn't even recognized as a terror group by any Western nation so you're being ridiculous.
Your assertion that Israel has ties with Jundallah was already debunked and it is based on the far-left Ha'aretz's claims that are in turn based allegedly on some random CIA memo. The claims regarding the MEK are also mere rumors and assassinating Iranian-government personnel who are the key in advancing the Iranian regime towards nuclear weapons is far from being terrorism. The claim regarding the PKK is simply absurd - not only has Israel never aided the PKK it is actually told to have helped arrest its leader back in 1999 in Kenya.

The US had never supported ISIS, it has supported the rebels in general until it was revealed that the weapons it provides are falling to the hands of terror groups such as al-Qaeda and ISIS. That's not the same as supporting ISIS and you're being ridiculous. Same goes for Afghanistan and Jabat al-Nusra which is a branch of al-Qaeda. The Free Syrian Army, again, is not a recognized terror organization, it fights al-Assad and his soldiers and not civilians.

I have no doubt that even though I have debunked your claims for the second time now you're going to post them again in a different thread in a while from now. That's what propagandists do I guess.

Wow! We can't rely on "CIA memos" but we can rely on the apocalypse!!!!!
 
Whoa, you suggesting I have an agenda, I don't patronise Obama. If I think he's wrong, Libya, Egypt, Syria, I point it out, if I think he's right, Israel, Iran, I point that out. I think that particularly in the midst of nuclear negotiations with Ian, that this declassification represents politics, and not national security.

Ok. Why?

And have you read the Clapper report?

For the record, I was referring to GOP pols and talking heads, and the conservahacks here, as those with an agenda.
 

Iran FM: 'We'll continue enriching, we won't close facilities...all sanctions will be terminated.'




I have spelled out my six point approach to defeating the US diplomatically:

It's a strategy that is ages old. Hell, it is a common tool of "community organizers".

1) Reach a vague agreement in principle with a politically motivated opponent.

2) Wait for the opponent to tie themselves to the deal by announcing the terms of the deal publically for political gain.

3) Counter-announce that the terms spelled out by your opponent publically with regard to your responsibilities are actually incorrect.

4) Your opponent will then state that they are going to drop their end of the bargain if you don't keep yours.

5) Announce that your opponent is backing away from the responsibilities they themselves admitted publically to agreeing to, and are the only verifiable terms of the agreement.

6) Your Opponent, not willing to look like they lost the negotiation, will then keep their end of the bargain, relieving you of obligation of keeping yours.


Repeat this as often as necessary until you achieve the goal your opponent didn't want you to achieve.


For those keeping score, we are on step 3.
 
Ok. Why?

And have you read the Clapper report?

For the record, I was referring to GOP pols and talking heads, and the conservahacks here, as those with an agenda.

Ok, thanks for the agenda clarification. And yes, I just this morning read the Iranian/Hezbollah aspects of Clapper's report, (the .gov report not a media summary) and that only reinforces the question mark of removing them from their assessment list. Obvious to me is that it was one of the concessions that the Obama administration had to make with Iran to secure a framework deal, worth the expense of the GOP criticism that would be sure to follow. Again, this is clear politics, not true US national security interest, and as such the significance.
 
Iran cannot destroy Isreal so that argument is moot. NK has repeatedly stated that it wants a war of annihilation and they have brainwashed their people for that. I have met Iranians overseas who are studying for medical degrees and they are not fanatics, they are a democracy.

Two hydrogen bombs and Israel is forever gone.
 
I have spelled out my six point approach to defeating the US diplomatically:




For those keeping score, we are on step 3.

The problem with your theory is that this is not a unilateral, Obama administration deal, but a UNSC plus Germany deal. So you're accusing all of being out maneuvered by Iran.
 
Wow! We can't rely on "CIA memos" but we can rely on the apocalypse!!!!!

How original and funny... not.
The article I was referring to is an Ha'aretz article asserting that they have an email a CIA member sent to another talking about Israel having ties with Jundallah.
Hence unreliable.

Funny how you're more than enthusiastic to embrace baseless assertions such as this when they are carrying an anti-Western/American/Israeli agenda but when the only reasonable conclusion is that Iran wishes to produce nuclear weapons you go "there is no proof for that, they want it for peaceful reasons". :lol:
Goes to show how hypocritical and disconnected you and those who share that evil agenda (because there's no better label for the support of pretty much every murderous agenda on this planet) of yours are.
 
The problem with your theory is that this is not a unilateral, Obama administration deal, but a UNSC plus Germany deal. So you're accusing all of being out maneuvered by Iran.

And? Who spearheading this deal?

I am fully aware that a year or two from now the Democrats will be blaming this disastrous deal on Bush.
 
And? Who spearheading this deal?
The US has done most of the "heavy-lifting", but all P5+1 nations and the EU must sign-off on it

I am fully aware that a year or two from now the Democrats will be blaming this disastrous deal on Bush.
That ... is sheer hyperbole and quite impossible.
 
468109332-1024x595.jpg


There are 8 flags represented at the Lausanne negotiations. A deal requires the agreement of all of these entities.
 
Back
Top Bottom